MH17 Ukraine disaster: Dutch report blames missile

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Those holes were obviously caused by 20mm cannon shells!

a reply to: intrptr

Agreed. Operation Phooey… Investigation objective? Not, done in secret by member state of NATO.

Neither Ukraine nor Malayasia are members of NATO. But go ahead, demonize NATO to your heart's content. Just ask yourself why Russia doesn't want a criminal investigation at the UN level.

Comparing the first two pics, I would say that the BUK test done by the russians does indeed show less spread, in other words, holes are closer together, and more abundant.





What is really strange, is that the large hole in the side panel as it was found is now "fixed" in the side panel in the reconstruction. It is clearly still attached at some points, so it's not like they found the piece and just suspended it in there. Wth?

a reply to: RogueWave

Comparing the first two pics, I would say that the BUK test done by the russians does indeed show less spread, in other words, holes are closer together, and more abundant.

I'm sure the "test" was carefully staged to make the damage as unlike as possible.

a reply to: DJW001

I am sure that this is something that you would have to say.

Any thoughts on the other point I made?

a reply to: RogueWave

Any thoughts on the other point I made?

So what? It's not clear when the photographs were taken or how much tampering by the rebels took place. Are you really that desperate to find something "fishy?"

a reply to: DJW001

It's not clear when the photographs were taken or how much tampering by the rebels took place. Are you really that desperate to find something "fishy?"

Now that's some BS. Various pics have been made of this panel and it circulated the internet for the past year. Now in the reconstruction, suddenly the hole is filled, and the piece is still attached to the rest of the panel.

This has nothing to do with supposed tampering of the rebels, or you are suggesting that the rebels sneaked into Gilze-Rijen airbase with that missing piece, put it in the place of the hole and somehow fused it together......

I am not even saying it means anything in the big picture, but one can't deny that this is a bit strange and unexplainable.

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

BUK producer detonates missiles next to pilot’s cockpit in real-life MH17 experiment

F*** me. Pretty conclusive isn't it? Gotta say, in the past I have been focused on the cockpit damage on the left side of the aircraft from a shoot down via aircraft cannon…

(choking on my effluence…]

Heres a pic of the left cockpit window found in the crash area… (pg 79 in the report)

a reply to: RogueWave

Now in the reconstruction, suddenly the hole is filled, and the piece is still attached to the rest of the panel.

Doesn't reconstruction mean "put back together?" Are you seriously suggesting that because they duck taped the panel together there is something wrong?

a reply to: intrptr

Pretty sure the video proves it was not aircraft cannon.

a reply to: DJW001

Neither Ukraine nor Malayasia are members of NATO. But go ahead, demonize NATO to your heart's content. Just ask yourself why Russia doesn't want a criminal investigation at the UN level.

Because Russia, like everyone else, knows that a whole other investigation would just drag the secrecy on longer. Ask yourself, why this "big" investigative report, "The" report, the report everyone has waited for to find out who did it, doesn't address culpability? Well, here it is, the "Crash" report, not the criminal report.

Oh, that? You get to wait with everyone else for that further part.

Don't hold your breath.

Thank you Dutch Safety Board… we already know the plane crashed, everyone died. We know it happened over Ukraine Hostile Airspace, during a war. And everyone knows it wasn't accidental, but a shoot down.

Lets see… thats it. Oh, BUK did it.

a reply to: RogueWave

It seems like it is still attached at some points because of the angle from where the picture was taken.
The use of a BUK is a certainty, the question is however, what was the distance between the BUK and MH17.
What is clear is the side and height, since it was struck on the side of Captain and slightly above MH17 because fragments did perforate the floor of the cockpit.

There are a few things to say about this test, first this test blast is in stationary conditions.
In the actual situation the BUK travelled with a speed of mach 3 (3500 kph), MH17 travelled with a speed of m 0.8 (900 kph) so they were coming towards eachother with a speed of at least 4000 kph at a hight of 33000 feet.
A BUK dives towards its target which means the angle in the test is wrong and probably exploded to close to its target in this stationary test simulation.
The other point is of course that MH17 was pressurized when it was shot down.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: intrptr

Pretty sure the video proves it was not aircraft cannon.

The video is not footage of MH17, so it can't rightly be called proof. It similar and compelling, but not forensics of MH17 itself.

However, the left cockpit window in the report leaves little doubt, imo. Cannon fire would have pierced the window with a lot bigger holes, as is the window is a good indication that something exploded outside the cockpit in close proximity.

Real close in fact, since the shrapnel is small and densely packed on the window itself.

a reply to: earthling42

It seems like it is still attached at some points because of the angle from where the picture was taken.

Could be, but sure seems attached to me.

A BUK dives towards its target which means the angle in the test is wrong

Angle seem to be the same as in the Dutch report.

a reply to: DJW001

Doesn't reconstruction mean "put back together?" Are you seriously suggesting that because they duck taped the panel together there is something wrong?

Like I said 2 times before, it obviously looks like it is still attached to the panel at some points, on its own, where it wasn't, when the panel pics appeared on the net.

a reply to: intrptr

And everyone knows it wasn't accidental, but a shoot down.

Are you saying the rebels shot a passenger jet down deliberately?

a reply to: DJW001

Are you saying the rebels shot a passenger jet down deliberately?

No, you are, have and always will…

before and after any report.

a reply to: RogueWave

Actually, he's right. BUK typically attacks from above and behind to thwart evasion. That explains the holes in the cabin floor and the relative intact left lower belly of the aircraft as presented on stage.

Would also point backward along the flight path, back into Ukraine. Not forward into "separatists" territory.

a reply to: intrptr

No, you are, have and always will…

No, I have never said that. I have always said that it was most likely shot down by the rebels accidentally.

before and after any report.

I find it curious that you need mountains of evidence before you will even consider the possibility it was downed by a missile, but you believe "everyone knows" the Ukrainians did it deliberately. No matter. We all knew you would claim the report is a lie. I also predicted that the Putinistas would start dredging up all the little details that Russia deliberately planted in the blogosphere. The eyewitnesses who saw airplanes. The Spanish air traffic controller. The alleged cannon holes....

a reply to: intrptr

But the damage indicates that the missile was detonated from in front, indicating it came from the east.